Communication: judgment No. 0146 of 2020

IDENTIFIER
62020CA0146
LANGUAGE
English
COURT
Court of Justice of the European Union
AG OPINION
NO
REFERENCES MADE
5
REFERENCED
1
DOCUMENT TYPE
Communication: judgment

Judgment



21.2.2022   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84/9


Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 21 December 2021 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Düsseldorf, Landesgericht Korneuburg — Germany, Austria) — AD, BE, CF v Corendon Airlines (C-146/20), JG, LH, MI, NJ v OP, acting as liquidator of Azurair GmbH (C-188/20), Eurowings GmbH v flightright GmbH (C-196/20), AG, MG, HG v Austrian Airlines AG (C-270/20)

(Joined Cases C-146/20, C-188/20, C-196/20 and C-270/20) (1)

(References for a preliminary ruling - Air transport - Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 - Common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of cancellation or long delay of flights - Articles 2 and 3 - Concepts of ‘operating air carrier’, ‘confirmed reservation’ and ‘scheduled time of arrival’ - Articles 5, 7 and 8 - Flight departure time brought forward in relation to the original planned departure time - Classification - Reduction in the amount of compensation - Offer of re-routing - Article 14 - Obligation to inform passengers of their rights - Scope)

(2022/C 84/10)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesgericht Korneuburg

Parties to the main proceedings

(Case C-146/20)

Applicants: AD, BE, CF

Defendant: Corendon Airlines

(Case C-188/20)

Applicants: JG, LH, MI, NJ

Defendant: OP, acting as liquidator of Azurair GmbH

Interested party: alltours flugreisen GmbH

(Case C-196/20)

Applicant: Eurowings GmbH

Defendant: flightright GmbH

(Case C-270/20)

Applicants: AG, MG, HG

Defendant: Austrian Airlines AG

Operative part of the judgment

1.

Article 3(2)(a) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91, must be interpreted as meaning that the passenger has a ‘confirmed reservation’, within the meaning of that provision, where the tour operator submits to that passenger, with whom it has a contract, ‘other proof’, within the meaning of Article 2(g) of that regulation, by which he or she is assured transport on a particular flight, individualised by points of departure and destination, times of departure and arrival, and the flight number, even in cases where that tour operator has not received confirmation from the air carrier concerned as to the times of departure and arrival of that flight;

2.

Article 2(b) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that an air carrier may be classified as an ‘operating air carrier’ within the meaning of that provision in respect of a passenger if that passenger has concluded a contract with a tour operator for a particular flight operated by that air carrier without that air carrier having confirmed the hours of the flight or without that tour operator having made a booking for that passenger with that air carrier;

3.

Article 2(h), Article 5(1)(c), the second sentence of Article 7(1) and Article 7(2) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that the scheduled time of arrival of a flight, within the meaning of those provisions, can be determined, for the purposes of the compensation payable under Article 7 of that regulation, from ‘other proof’ within the meaning of Article 2(g) of that regulation, issued to the passenger by the tour operator;

4.

Article 2(l) and Article 5(1) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that a flight is regarded as having been ‘cancelled’ in the case where the operating air carrier brings that flight forward by more than one hour;

5.

Article 7(2) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that it is not applicable to a situation in which the amount of time by which the arrival of a flight has been brought forward is within the limits referred to in that provision;

6.

Article 5(1)(a) and Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that informing a passenger, before the beginning of his or her journey, that his or her flight has been brought forward may constitute an ‘offer of re-routing’ within the meaning of that latter provision;

7.

Article 14(2) of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as requiring the operating air carrier to inform the air passenger of the precise name and address of the undertaking from which that passenger may claim compensation under Article 7 of that regulation and, where appropriate, to specify the documents which must be attached to his or her claim for compensation, without, however, requiring that carrier to inform the air passenger of the exact amount of compensation which the latter may potentially obtain under Article 7 of that regulation.


(1)  OJ C 230, 13.7.2020.

OJ C 271, 17.8.2020.

OJ C 279, 24.8.2020.



Citations

Sign up for a free moonlit.ai™ account to access all citing documents.